tv Government Access Programming SFGTV August 13, 2019 6:00pm-7:01pm PDT
>> good afternoon. i would like to call the meeting at the san francisco public utilities commission to order. can we please have the roll call , madam secretary? >> president cane is excused today. [roll call] we have a quorum. >> the next item is the approval of the minutes for july 23rd, 2019. is there a motion to approve the minutes of july? >> so moved. >> is there a second? >> second. >> any further comments on these
minutes? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. the next item is general public comment. i have a few cards here. good afternoon. >> good afternoon, commissioners today, i want to recap, you know , when i come over here during general public comment, sometimes i reveal to you all a few things and then when i sit down, and, you know, i cannot be here forever, because i have other things to do, i leave. and other people come and they talk about your interns and this and that, and we the public, and
the constituents and taxpayers of the bayview hunter's point area, we are not fully cognizant of what is happening with large amounts of money, okay? so one of the commissioners, i will not name him, he did say the last time about the sewer system improvement project. is started with a 6 billion-dollar figure, and i'm telling you that at the rate things are happening, it's going to be like $15 billion, i repeat , $15 billion. with what is happening in the economy, the tariffs, and so on and so forth. now, none of our commissioners, i know two commissioners over there went to check on this and something else. and then when somebody was giving a presentation here, she
said, you know, they are going to go down 30 feet, and then it commissioners said no, we were told that we are going to go to bed rock, and so on and so forth so this mickey mouse must stop. this mickey mouse with the millennium building, it is sinking 22 inches and tilting 1e salesforce building. we must be aware of such facts. now we have people in the san francisco public utilities commission who know nothing about workforce. let the workforce be done by the unions, that's where it belongs. i've said, in very simple terms, because i know about workforce a lot, that we want career jobs, we don't want this mickey mouse with some interns and we want to talk about the sewer system improvement project and bring
the interns from the water system improvement project. lasting they had interns over here, and they heard to speak and they said wow, is this what is happening with the as if you see? and they left. commissioners? we need to do our homework. we need to have our heart in the right place. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> can i comment through the chair? >> please. >> thank you for your words because the labor movement is the only independent organization of different trades in america that actually fights for workers. for you to acknowledge that, i thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. i have another public comment card from and clark. good afternoon. >> good afternoon. thank you very much for having
me. i am with the commonwealth club of california. you have an announcement, i think it is very strange to have this announcement on november 10 th, but these announcements have to go in early. so we got this done so that we could get it to you so it can go into the magazine and the programs at the commonwealth clubs. november 10th is city college of san francisco engineering, architecture, technology and the environment, and we gave you a list of the kinds of things that we are doing at city college. it is really quite wonderful. you will see that there's a lot going on in terms of the environment and a lot of help that we have had all of these years from s.f. you see. we really want to thank you for all of your help and support. and finally, i really need -- i mean this has been a wonderful alliance between san francisco
and city college. finally, i want you to know i was a volunteer leader for camp may there for the last week. and we won the bingo problem. we had the highest bingo. >> congratulations. >> thank you. it was hot up there, we had a wonderful time, and as always, camp mather was really fun and really good. we had an awful lot of little kids this year. it was quite amazing how many little kids and families that were there. we had a couple people who came, and we also met his father-in-law in the line for dinner. if you get a chance to go to camp mather, come because it is a very special place. again, we look forward to the program on november 10th, and
i will remind you of that, of the city college of san francisco's engineering, architecture, technology and environment program that we will have on november 10th. thanks a lot. it will be at the commonwealth club. thank you. >> thank you. thank you for all of your good work on behalf of camp mather. we really appreciate it. i have another public comment card. good afternoon, peter. >> good afternoon. i'm with the river trust. as i have mentioned before, we have had some concerns about the water supply assessments and the disconnect between sfpuc and the planning commission. it sounds like some progress is being made in communications, which is a good thing. i will share a letter that we submitted on the flower mart project from the planning commission just to give you a
sense of some of our issues. our concerns did attract attention of the mayor's office and we appreciated people pulling together a small meeting last week. we appreciated others participating. it was a constructive meeting. we hope it was the beginning of an ongoing dialogue. we think there are a lot of things we could do working together to meet the state's goals of ensuring reliable water supply and restoring the ecosystem. there are a lot of factors that influence water supply and longer-term outcomes. for example, demand, and sa pointed out before, there was quite a difference between projected demand for 2018 and actual demand of the 31 -- there was a 30 1% difference. if we can get better at demand projections for the future, that should impact our drought planning scenario. water rights and new supplies,
we talked about it a number of times here. there are flow requirements from the state board and the sfpuc. if it is based on the fourth agreement, it is 51.7%, if it is based on a share of use, it would be 20%, that would be a big difference. the board has not determined how they are going to address that so far. the level of rationing, we saw 30% decline in demand between 2006 and 2016. that was quite remarkable, and it shows we can accomplish a lot by storage. maybe their opportunities, especially additional groundwater storage, maybe in the central valley partnering with the irrigation districts to capture extra water on what years and sharing some of that, similar to the water bank on pedro. and then obviously drought planning, which is something that has come up a lot. we are hoping that weekend have ongoing dialogue, engaging stakeholders, and see if we can
work together to come up with a solution that meets everyone's needs. thank you very much. >> thank you. any other general comments at this time? hearing none, next item, please. >> item five is communications. >> so you have before you communications. are there any questions or comments on anything in the communications packet? any general comments? public comments on communications? hearing none, next item. >> item six is report of the general manager. >> good afternoon, commissioners the first item i would like to bring up michael carlin to talk about they delta water quality control plan update.
>> actually, we will have steve do the presentation, but i can do it, as well. i am here today. >> good to see you. it has been a while. >> i have been on vacation at camp mather. >> a big bingo week i understand >> before you start, do you want to share -- i mean you can have steve give the presentation, but i want you to share the meeting that you had with the mayor and peter and what the outcomes were , and the commitments that were made. >> we did have a meeting in the mayor's office. the mayor's chief of staff did convene a meeting with the senior visor on the environment. in attendance were several people from the river trust and river strategies and gatekeeper.
the purpose of the meeting was to allow the stakeholders to present what they think needs to be addressed by the p.u.c., and in many cases, we agree with them because there are things that we are going to do, or are doing that are ongoing such as, we are looking at diversifying the water supply. we have are many questions -- discussions about that. we are working on those projects they are in our budget and we will be presenting those to you as well as talking to some of the stakeholders. some of those projects involve others, as mentioned, such as the modesto irrigation districts , but we haven't reached a point where we actually have project proposals to put on the table with them. we continue to work on those. we continue to work going forward on our demand projections and our draft scenarios. next year we have to deal with the urban water management plan.
in that plan we have to show the projections of what we think our water supply needs will be and how we will meet those needs, and how we will basically whether a drought. we have eight drought protection -- production cycle of eight and a half years. that is consistent with where the state is going. right now they are at five years and if we look at what they are trying to project to do in the california water plan, they may be asking for longer drought scenarios based on climate change. the other thing that we have been working on, and this is the process of launching an agreement, and launching an agreement just as the water quality with a full plan. and the voluntary agreements that we have proposed, we stated publicly a number of different flow and nonflow measures. and what i mean by nonflow measures as habitat improvements on the river for the fish that were targeted for enhancement.
as we worked work through that process with the state, and i will steal all your thunder, steve, sorry. we are working with the state team and the state team consists of -- if i can go to the slides will quickly, that would be helpful. so this is just a depiction of the rivers and their tributaries of course, were talking about the three tributaries on the lower san joaquin river. these are the three river systems that were covered by the plans. and no other river systems are
covered by the plan that was adopted on december 12, 2019. but the agreement process is represented by many of the tributaries that are depicted here, including many of those on the sacramento side. you have to keep that in mind as we go through this that while the plan affects three tributaries, the voluntary agreement process is affecting much more than that. so when i talk about the team, what i mean by the state team as a secretary for the california natural resources agency, the secretary of the california environment protection agency, the state water board and their staff, the department of water resources, in the department of fish and wildlife. so these are the principal players that we have been dealing with in negotiating with over the past several months. they are trying to process as one state, which we appreciate because otherwise we get fragments of discussions and direction from the state. there are a number of different work groups that have been formed. i apologize if some of these things are cryptic.
assets to outcomes means basically how do you use the flow and nonflow measures to have a projection of an outcome for a fishery? enhancement of the fishery, doubling of the population, those kinds of things that are actually necessary to have a measurable outcome, and we are working on what those are as far as biological and environment of targets. it is not like we're just going to put water down the river, but there is a target we are trying to hitch. there's also a government science and adaptive management group. they're trying to promote the decision-making process. for the river, many of the flows and nonflow measures are also part of a fork process that are energy regulatory commission process and the relicensing of the dam. this is where the fourth agreement comes in. our assets, our flexibility is not there is much people would like to think. for example, on the sacramento
side, they're talking about, when did they want to have flow show up on the sacramento river? they have much more discretion because they can have the water show up in june, they can have the water show up in may, we are looking at targeting mid march and april for flood cleaning and outmigration flow probably in late april to may, to june. part of this also is a discussion has a state water contractors. i have talked to you about putting a.v. on diversions. this will be money that they would collect and part of the government science and the documentary program would be to distribute those fees and how they are allocated and spent. >> sorry, who would issue this? and he would do it? >> if you want to look at it this way, the question is
whether or not we participate in that or not and that has to be determined because our assets are not that flexible and we are also self funding all the improvements on the river right now. >> who would determine how this would be spent? >> that is part of the hold government structure. when i talked about what i showed you earlier, it is the intro to the tributaries and san joaquin. the discussions are now dominating on the sacramento side. that is where 80% of the water goes into. the exporters, the central valley project and the state water project are heavily invested in that system. that is where most of the water is and that is where most of their assets are located. >> it is part of the conversation of what the government structure could and should look like. would that be part of the vsa, part of the plan? >> it could be. this talks about whether there is an overall umbrella agreement
amongst all the parties. that is nothing else we could look at. a number of different policy issues, the first one is a critical path one. whether the plan should be amended and related to the viability of native fishes. right now we have a narrative objective and a near -- any numerical objective. we're looking at whether we have a narrative objective and then use a plan of limitation to include the numerical target or the voluntary agreement. that is something we want to talk to parties about. we don't want to have -- if we agree with the state team, we don't want to have the state water board as part of the team to come back and say, we want more from you, we want to settle all at once and all the parties are approaching it that way. enforcing commitments by the state water board, and this is where i'm not a lawyer, and i can't even quote the government
code section. basically that would be placed into the plan and would allow the state water board, under that government code section, to take enforcement code action to any nonperforming party. i think that's really important to have that. and there's another big question that comes up and that is what happens at the end of 15 years? we are already kind of discussing how, you know, if you think about the lifecycle of the salmon, the lifecycle of the salmon is about three years. and a 15 year period you might have five year classes and, you know, what happens if -- it is hard to see a trend, you know, so we are already talking about if things are performing well, if we are meeting our targets, and doing some of the things we would do, there could be an automatic extension of the agreement. >> question.
>> sure. >> so the state is basically looking at the biggest rivers. >> yeah, the two biggest rivers. there are numerous tributaries. >> so the tributaries in your agreement, you all are saying, we want to include the others. >> correct. >> so with the state saying you don't fulfil your obligations -- >> they all have their own separate agreement and then there might be a pour over agreement of how the parties are going to work together. and then some parties, let's say there's tributary exit doesn't have an agreement, the plan would actually subject them to the elements of the plan that, you know, we are trying to get away from unimpaired flow to get into functional flow. they'd be subject to the unimpaired flow appreciation that we could put in place. if your party is looking at that as an option, you want to come
up with a plan that makes sense. >> you mentioned platinum advises at the very beginning. who did they represent? >> i'm not exactly sure. i just noticed that was on the card. >> he was an individual representing himself? >> yeah. i was just trying to associate who was with what. i think he is just on his own capacity. >> okay. platinum advisors -- i would like to know who is in the room. if he is in there on his own, that's fine. if he is there with platinum advisors then -- >> i will refer that back to you >> thank you. >> going back to the slides once again, i already mentioned this. some of our issues are the state team in the majority of the participants are focused on the sacramento river side. that's where 80% of the water comes from.
i think one of the things that we have is a very structured and well thought out and detailed voluntary agreement that we have put together. some of the other agreements are still fuzzy. they need to get a little bit more clarity with how they are participating. we are the only tributary that is involved in the voluntary agreement on the san joaquin river side. there are ongoing discussions with those entities and hopefully we can bring them to the table because it would be nice to have a package of all the phase i entities. the technical details really are important. you need to be very clear about what we're saying, what we are committing to, and how we're going to achieve that over a 50 year period. it is important to you as a commission because you will be approving, authorizing, appropriating funds to carry out these military agreements --
these agreements. schedule. so this is where you won't see me anymore. august 23rd is when the state workforce will come up with biological goals. this is only going to affect phase i which is the three tributaries that i have mentioned. by october 2019, the state board will have a determination of whether or not they are satisfactory for ceqa analysis for the state board as an alternative to what they have already written. and then they have to carry that forward in a sequin analysis and a substitute if environmental document. they also need to put together by statute, a scientific basis report for the voluntary agreements. there's thinking that those might be done by spring 2020. they have put out an outline of those reports.
we have actually commented on those. we will hear back from them. right now the schedule is that they will complete the draft sequel document by summer of 2020, and finally adopt it in summer of 2021. that is also what i would think they would take action on the state water board. it is kind of a long schedule. things can happen, as we all know, but we are on this path right now and we will continue to stay on this path and continue to negotiate and talk to anybody, anywhere, any time about that decision. i will be glad to answer any questions. >> i have a couple of questions. >> i just wanted to also point out that we are planning to give a presentation to the planning commission. >> right. we are coordinating with the mayor's office to give a presentation to the planning commission on the assessments and what they mean. we have been working very closely with the planning
assessors as we always have to put this information forward to the planning commission prior to that meeting. there's a memo that will be prepared by planning commission staff. we are involved in this. we will report on the date when that takes place. >> we have accardo -- can we have a copy, too? >> absolutely. >> august 23rd, when the biological goals will be set, that will come from that state working group? >> no, it comes in the state water board staff. they will just release the document. they will be kind to build a schedule and workshop around those goals. there's no timeline about how they would adopt them or what they mean. we have asked questions about whether they are part of the water quality control plan, whether it is a statement by the state water board, and we are still in those discussions with the various parties in sacramento about that. >> i would love to request at
our next meeting, that will be a public document, i assume? >> sure. >> that we could get a briefing on what those say. i think those have significant implications especially since we did put a red -- put forth a resolution asking for the outcomes and what those look like. >> right. we will read it over the weekend and be ready. >> i also was curious about where the points of contention still seem like they are in these conversations because my recollection is they were still april the tea relatively big divide on the p.u.c.'s plan, on rva, if you will, and some of the other, particularly the nonprofits, with some of the other groups and agencies that have different opinions. are they still a point of it contention that you are trying to iron out? >> absolutely. one of these issues is that the voluntary agreement to the unimpaired flows.
sometimes it will be less than what is in the state plan right now, but we believe that bike on -- compensating it, would have to have improvements and other measures that we get a far superior outcome than what the state board has proposed. we are having discussions with the state board staff because one of the things that they are trained to figure out is how they value the habitat improvements. they did not do that in phase i. there is not -- no talk about if you prove that fish can spawner you improve conditions over summer, basically the floodplain habitat, there was no discussion on the part of the state board -- state board staff. they running some models and in your resolutions. we were urging the state water board to do early peer-reviewed of some of the models that they are using so we can see how they are functioning at this point. >> right. that is underway. >> not quite yet. we are still talking about the board staff and they have issues
with the model that they want to run. it is not lining up or conforming to some other model results. it is within the state team that they are trying to iron that out if ironed out this week, we will know which way we are going, in which direction. i should mention that basically we think it is valuable for you to know. >> that is good to hear. that has been on the table for a while. >> yes. >> i think that would encourage a lot of the people with these processes. >> correct. >> thank you. >> any questioners for him? >> on the presentation of the planning commission, i had hoped that we would be able to adopt a policy about extreme shortages
and how the rationing would be under those circumstances. we hoped to have that at the last meeting. will we have an opportunity to adopt the policy before the presentation is made to the planning commission? >> i don't have a firm answer to that. right now there is talk towards the end of august and so i'm not sure that is firmed up yet but if i can come back with a date to the secretary, then she can pass that on. >> if the commission has action that is more general than just the handful, it provides a policy framework that supports those assessments. i think that would be as just a strong position as it goes to the planning commission. >> perhaps we should orchestrate that's what happens before we go to the planning commission. that is my thought.
>> that would be great. >> that would be great. if we could see some draft policy framework statements that is intended to go before planning, that would be great. >> thank you. >> any public comment on this item? i have a card for you. >> commissioners, 300 years ago, the state team that was mentioned this list for the california natural resources agency, the california environmental protection agency, the state water board, the department of water resources, the department of fish and wildlife, none of them existed 300 years ago. the tribes, the native americans have been there for 13,000 years this is a very convoluted subject.
i'm going to stick to the river. we abuse that river for a long time. now we are pretending to do something, but they are doing nothing, and the way we do nothing is by saying, you know, we don't have the authority, the state has the authority. this commission has been so backward in not having some firm policies that one the planning department asked you all for something, you didn't have it ready. so then you rush at the 11th hour. i am watching the deliberation and most of you are not doing it so what is happening here? let me stick to the river. in the year 2019, we are flushing our toilets with clean drinking water.
in the year 2019, we don't have the decency to invite to the native american tribes who preserve them and protect this area for a long, long time for thousands of years. you don't have the decency to invite them to the table. you need to have the certification, you need to have this knowledge, you have to have access to data, you have to have access to computers, you have no spirituality. if you had no spirituality, you will fall flat on your face, like it is happening right now. now, finally, you have to make up your mind that all the skyscrapers that are being built , they have to pay more for clean drinking water. this millennium building, the millions and millions of gallons that were sucked from the watershed and put into our sewer system and not brought to our attention, we have to have a hearing.
we need to have a hearing, a very holistic hearing. who owns this land? kansas city -- the city doesn't have a single document to say that the tribes were handed one square inch to them. it was stolen. thank you very much. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? general manager, next item, please. >> the next item is clean power s.f.'s a.g.m., barbara hill.
>> i apologize for the delay. i am the assistant general manager for power. today, i'm here to present our first clean power s.f. quarterly update. a report on customer enrolment and service status. efforts to secure long-term power commitments from renewable resources, and job impacts of clean power s.f. first, our enrolment and service to customers. clean power s.f. continues to serve customers successfully,
meeting our customer needs and our regulatory requirements. we conducted our last nature auto enrolment process this past april, so it is a good time for us to recap our overall program enrolment. we also want to share with you what we heard from the customers to opt out and why they chose topped out. our program popped out percentage over the life of the program, from its may 2016 start , is three-point for -- is three-point four%. we experience in 96% retention rate. that is 6,300 accounts electing to receive 100% renewable like electricity from us. at previous meetings, you've asked us to bribe information on the reasons customers opt out the clean power s.f. program. we had approximately 280,000
customer accounts enrolled during the april enrolment period. about 10,000 of those folks opted out. customers that choose to opt out of the program are asked why. the primary answer it if -- primary answers given or rate or customer concerns, dislike with being automatically enrolled, and declined to answer. we are required by state law to automatically enrolled customers so there's really, you know, not much we can do about addressing that concern, and of course, we respect customers' choices to decline to answer why they opted out. the most frequently cited reason at 30 6% of customers who opted out is rate or cost concern. they pay less then bundled customers. when electricity cost is a customer concern, clean power s.f. should be the preferred choice. we are discussing with our
communications folks how to ensure that our outreach improves customer's trust that when we say we are competitively priced, we aren't steering them wrong. we have some work to do their. the second item i want to report to you today is with respect to our efforts to secure long-term power supply commitments. yesterday we issued a new renewable energy solicitation inviting renewable energy to clean power s.f. and to customers from new or operating renewable energy resources located in northern california with a preference for energy and resources located in the nine bay area counties. that is what we have traditionally characterized as our local resource area. we are inviting bids with a minimum annual energy deliveries of 50,000-megawatt hours a year.
that is -- that would equate to about the annual energy from a 20-megawatt solar project, for example, and a maximum of 600,000-megawatt hours per year, which equates to about a 200- megawatt solar project. we are inviting offers with and without battery storage. for proposals coming from newman noble energy resources, we are requiring prevailing wage with a preference for projects that commit to project labor agreements. our initial delivery date ranges from january 2021 to december 2023, with terms of up to 25 years. we are including an option to include community benefits in these bid packages. we're expecting to receive bid submittals on august 28th. we estimate that power purchase negotiations and contract approvals will occur in the october to december time frame. we will be reporting to you more on that as it develops at the
next quarterly report. that brings me to job impacts. power purchase agreements like i just said we are hoping to make under this new solicitation really induce construction. since we launched clean power s.f., we have now entered into three long-term power purchase agreements to buy renewable power from plants to be constructed in california. those plants include a 100- megawatt project which just began commercial operation. the succeeding megawatt solar project which will commence operation in september of 2020, in the 47-megawatt of voyager four wind project which is slated to become commercially operational in december of 2020. in total, these projects are representing about 209 megawatts of new renewable energy capacity in california. it will create about 750
construction jobs. as i mentioned, the san pablo raceway project just became operational, completing construction in july. i have some slides that i would like to show you from a trip the members of our staff, together with the developers, had in june , together with the construction team. there was a visit to lancaster, california, so that we could see the project -- the progress on the plant. let me queue those up and ask the t.v. folks to show that. robin, who is the p.u.c.'s head photographer, went along and took some great photos of the projects and the workers installing solar panels. in total, 350 workers built the project over a six to seven
month period. construction jobs are an important part of the clean power s.f. job story, his or the desk jobs created by the program about 20 staff members have been added to the p.u.c. to support the implementation and operation of the clean power s.f. program. this includes new stuff and power enterprise operating groups, as well as p.u.c. bureaus including accounting, customer service, external affairs, and human resources. we anticipate bringing on an additional nine positions before the year is over, about 27 in total this fiscal year. the upcoming budget year, we will be focused on converting temporary positions, established to support the launch and growth of clean power s.f. program, and to permit -- permanent civil services positions. those are clean power careers. with that, i'm happy to take any questions you might have. thank you. >> commissioners? >> i have a couple of questions.
i'm still a bit curious about the people who are opting out. >> yes. >> it is interesting that you characterize it -- maybe it is true that it might be a trust issue, because what first came to my mind is possibly they just don't know that it is cheaper to enrolled with clean power s.f. and i think they have implications for communication strategies. >> when a customer is talking to a live customer service representative about their interest in opting out, if they say that they are worried about the price, that is reviewed with them, the fact that we are less expensive. that is why i am talking with the clean power s.f. staff and the communications folks. we came to a conclusion that maybe what we have here is more of a trust issue. and i would also say we are very careful -- we don't want to mislead customers.
what we characterize for them is the fact that our rates are competitive. we don't typically say -- we can't promise them that our rates will always be whatever% they are cheaper today forever when a customer is making their decision. we emphasize that we lead with affordability and competitive prices is what they will receive >> i just wanted to put it in perspective. out of 100% of everyone we opted in, 90 7% are -- out of 3%, you say 34% came up with affordability -- >> thirty-six%. >> i just want to put it in perspective.
>> yes, we are working to be the best. >> i just think it is a communications opportunity, shall we say and maybe it is a two prong approach, one is a trust issue and the other one is to remind them that it is a more affordable project. >> yes. i'm happy to say that often. >> just -- you get additional points so if you are going to create jobs, and you are going to build a plant? >> we have a preference, but we are not restricting it to newly constructed plans. >> it will not be renewal constructed either. >> correct. we want to make sure that we
have a mix in our overall portfolio. we know that we need initial deliveries as early as january of 2021. we don't know what the overall capacity of new projects being constructed are and whether, you know, how many of those will be ready to deliver on january of 2021. so we need to be open to both projects that we are -- that are constructed and projects that are getting constructed. and frankly, some of the projects that we have come to -- contracted with overtime, you know, they may have been fairly newly constructed, but are coming off their first set of contracts and are looking to sell. we don't want to strand an existing, you know, performing resource, either, so these are the considerations as we go through the process. >> i think that, you know, what i have been hearing is there could potentially be, and is
even a supply issue that the state is going to be coming up against as it tries to meet and exceed its renewable goals. it would be interesting to continue to get feedback reporting from you on how many of these agreements are new construction, because that has an additional benefit of a job, or whether -- and how that will continue to help us meet supply and the state meet its goals, as well. >> yes. i am happy to keep reporting on that. >> the last question i have is around the job spee his. he said 750 construction jobs. once those are constructed, is it a new workforce that then comes in to maintain and operate , or are those 750 jobs go away? >> most of those jobs will just be temporary construction jobs. there will be a workforce that manages the maintenance and ongoing operations. they are not necessarily the same. >> right. it probably wouldn't be the same numbers, it probably -- it
wouldn't be 750. >> it wouldn't be anywhere near 750 to continue to operate and maintain. >> it be great at some point have a big picture of clean power s.f. even in a ten year period, or maybe it is after you have awarded these contracts, be able to say that over the next ten years, we will be seeing, you know, 750 construction jobs, you know, 100 maintenance jobs, ten jobs in-house, just to kind of have that is a big dashboard for us i think would be helpful. >> we can pull together on that. >> great. >> to the chair, if i can make a couple comments, every industry that people work at have different conditions. whether it is firefighter, janitor, bricklayer, or what have you, and i come from the construction industry. i never worked on the same job for more than a year. that is just the way it goes. i might work on the dam for six
months, and then i will go and work on some hotel in downtown san francisco. that is where the construction jobs are. there is maintenance, there is no doubt that there is maintenance stuff that happens. the sitting county of san francisco has plumbers and electricians who work at munimobile and the p.u.c., and what have you, but that -- it is not like, somebody was promised a job, 750 of them to do something here in town, and then they think that is your career decision. that is just not the way it works in construction. people actually do work many jobs. that is just the major -- that is just the nature of construction. i would like to know how that works because people do have misconceptions about how, oh, boy, i got a job at, mother, and i will work there with the rest of my life. no, that is not the way it works you will go many places.
i just wanted to put that in the record as a difference the difference between a permanent job versus the vagabond nature of the construction industry. >> thank you. any other comments? any public comment on this? >> thank you. >> this situation of clean power should be clarified once and for all. at one of my offices, supposedly -- [indiscernible] who do i pay? if i have problems, who do i call?
if i have to upgrade electricity and bring higher power from outside to inside, paying thousands of dollars, who do i go to? it is b.s. you know, about having solar farms and all. we, the people, back in 1999, we bagged sfpuc -- we bagged sfpuc. the only person, two people who agreed with us or mr. edwards and he passed away. commissioner richard straw. two decent human beings. sfpuc, and all this bull should that you hear has perturbed us a lot.
from the sierra club, they go to , and you know why? we do not have a hearing. i can ask okay, who do we pay? so what is your role? instead of clean s.f. power, blah blah blah, what is this? if i ask you commissioners, i want critical data on the so-called s.f. clean power, and they want empirical data on the stats and where we are getting it from. and if you find out that 40% is dirty, why are you calling it clean? this is b.s. this is like feel that you put in your car, and then you add the mickey mouse comedy, and then you watch that, anything
everything is okay, everything is not okay. again, the state is now passing legislation that they are going to have control, just like water and electricity. we, the people, need to have information about this. we, the people pay the salaries of all these people who make over $250,000 plus benefits. we, the people count. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? hearing none, next item, general manager? >> charles pearl to give an update on the quarterly update and performance review report. >> good afternoon. i'm the deputy chief financial officer. this is our quarterly visit to review the audit and performance review report that gives you an
overview of the various activities that are going on in the agency is a relates to oversight. if i could have the slides, please? here is a high level view of the prior year. this update is for last fiscal year which ended june 30th for fiscal 19. as you can see, we had 42 audits that were on the table. we completed 22 of them and we have another 15 that are currently in progress and another five that her upcoming. and a word about those, those will be wrapped up early in the current fiscal year 20. so that's very, very typical for how these audits work. and just a word on the number, 42 is a fairly standard amount of audit work that happens at the sfpuc throughout the year. the last quarter, that would be the cue four for fiscal 19, we
had seven audits that were started as noted here, our annul physical inventory account which is standard look at our warehousing to make sure that the physical numbers of things match with what our control and audit documents say, we do that invents of our final -- financial statement work. [please stand by]
then we looked at community benefit benefits, overall dashboard and evaluation framework, healthy and safety performance assessment, then royalties lease audit which i'll go into in a little more detail. the links to all these audits are noted on the agenda and the website if you want to look at any more of these details. in terms of a little more detail on one of these audits, we had a review of a quarry lease and we are a big agency and one of the things that we do is lease land and as a part of that lease we take a royalty and we want to
make sure through these audits that we are being paid for the appropriate amount as included in the lease. as noted here, the results of the lease confirmed the amount of revenue, a little over $55 million, which is a significant amount of money, from the period of january 1 through june 30 of 2018. the audit actually told us that we were overpaid, and that was a function of just looking at what the details of the lease were, what the payments that were made, and there was a reconciliation to make sure those two things were in alignment and there was an overpayment. one of the audit findings or recommendations is that a credit will be provided to the lessor. so there were six recommendations coming out of this audit and a lot of these will be lessons learned for us as we look at all of our leases
to make sure that we're doing right not only for ourselves but also for the lessor. with that, i just wanted to share with you the current year pork plan. we have about $1.3 million budgeted for audit work in the current year. that will include about 15 projects. as i showed you at the initial slide, some of the work that wasn't able to be completed last year will be wrapped up and included in those 15 projects that will get underway or wrapped up. some of the audits that are going to be getting underway is an external affairs divisional audit focused on our grant monitoring, including our oversight of our policies and procedures related to that. also the revenue bond oversight committee will have an audit that will get underway and our
city service auditor will be involved with that. we have continuing projects related to our human resources department and in particular helping improve our recruitment efforts and that's through their lean process training, which is helping our human resources folks improve how we do our recruitment. lastly, we are looking at an agency-wide community impact dashboard which already exists but we are going to be incorporating the infrastructure into that dashboard for the public to see. in terms of the current year, the audits that are underway now, we have an i.t. network security confidential audit that looking at our i.t. systems to make sure that those are safe and secure. we also have our standing financial audits, our wholesale
revenue audit, which is the audit associated with allocating costs to our wholesale water customers within the water enterprise to make sure that we're sharing costs according to our water supply agreement between retail and whole wholesale customers adequately. the annual physical inventory count i mentioned earlier. our financial statements, as i noted earlier, are getting underway and will wrap up in october. then upcoming, what comes out towards the end of the year in our second quarter will be the comprehensive annual financial report and our popular annual financial report, which will be snapshots of last fiscal year through the financial lens. >> so, madam chair, could we go back one slide. >> yes. >> so what jobs are you talking about in terms of lean hiring process and the